Shandong Iron & Steel Group

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

SISG has not publicly disclosed emissions reduction targets for any of its scope 1, 2 or 3 emissions originating from its operations or its supply chain. The company should develop a long-term target that aligns with a 1.5°C pathway. Moreover, SISG does not disclose its emissions data for 2022 or previous years. As a result, it is not possible to provide a meaningful assessment of the company’s past emissions trend or projected future performance. To demonstrate commitment to a low-carbon transition, companies should disclose at least five years of historic emissions data

SISG does not publicly disclose a low-carbon transition plan. The company should establish a time-bound action plan that outlines how it will transition to a low-carbon economy. The plan should be informed by climate scenario analysis to ensure its ambition aligns with a 1.5°C pathway. Further, there is no evidence that SISG has implemented board-level oversight of climate change or that any of its board members have significant expertise in the low-carbon transition. In addition, no evidence was found that the company has commitments to reduce scrap in its operations. The company should develop a comprehensive plan for scrap reduction with quantitative targets and a timeline and detail its method for implementing this plan.

SISG’s lack of climate and emissions reporting hinders a full view of its decarbonisation progress and plans. Moreover, the company does not disclose its investments in research and development (R&D) over the previous years, nor the proportion allocated to the development of low-carbon technologies. There is also no evidence that the company carries out interventions within its value chain to reduce emissions for purchased materials or products.

SISG does not publicly disclose a strategy to influence its suppliers to reduce emissions or to promote the use of low-carbon alternatives. Moreover, the company does not report a plan to engage with its clients. Next to having a supplier engagement strategy with quantified emissions reduction requirements for suppliers, SISG should also set out a clear strategy to promote its low-carbon solutions to clients. This could include providing financial incentives, such as discounts, or organising marketing campaigns. In addition, the company does not publicly publish a policy for engagement with trade associations. Furthermore, no evidence is presented that the company has an action plan outlining its response when alliances, associations, coalitions or think tanks of which it is a member, or to which it provides support, take a climate-negative stance.

SISG has not committed to reducing its carbon emissions from its operations or its supply chain. This contrasts with the company’s 1.5°C pathway, which requires it to make substantial decreases in its emissions intensity.

SISG’s lack of targets, strategy and emissions intensity data all suggest that the company is not yet committed to the low-carbon transition. The company does not publicly disclose emissions or activity data.

SISG has not developed a qualitative or quantitative vision of what its business will look like in a low-carbon future. The company should disclose its emissions for at least the past five years (2017 to 2022) to allow for a meaningful assessment of its historical emissions intensity trend.

SISG does not disclose its overall R&D expenditure nor the proportion that was dedicated to low-carbon technologies. Further, the company does not disclose the percentage of its revenues coming from low-carbon products or services.

SISG has not implemented a low-carbon transition plan. It does not have emissions reduction targets to focus action towards decarbonisation. There is also no evidence that the company intends to develop one in the near future. Additionally, the company does not have a strategy to engage with its suppliers and clients on emissions reduction.

No evidence was found of the company’s commitment to social dialogue or of the categories of stakeholders the company engages with on a just transition. Furthermore, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s ongoing social dialogue and meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders.

No evidence was found of the company undertaking low-carbon transition planning to mitigate the social impacts of the transition on workers, affected stakeholders and its business relationships. Additionally, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s engagement in social dialogue and with stakeholders in its just transition planning.

No public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to create and support access to green and decent jobs as part of the low-carbon transition. Moreover, no evidence was found of the company’s actions to promote these jobs in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups.

No relevant disclosure was found of the company’s assessment of employment dislocation risks. Further, no public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to reskill and upskill workers displaced by the transition to a low-carbon economy. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company reskills and upskills workers in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups.

No relevant disclosure was found to show if the company identifies the impacts of the low-carbon transition on social protection for workers and affected stakeholders, nor how it contributes to their social protection. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company expects its business relationships to contribute to the social protection of their workers and affected stakeholders.

No relevant disclosure was found to show how the company identifies any misalignment of its lobbying activities with policies and regulations that support the just transition, nor of the measures it takes to address misalignment. Furthermore, no evidence was found that the company lobbies for policies and regulations for green and decent job creation; retention, education and reskilling; and social protection for workers.

No company policies or commitments related to respect for human rights were found in the public domain. This includes the necessary policies and systems by which the company can ensure respect for basic human rights in its operations and supply chain.

No evidence of the company’s policies or commitments related to key decent work issues was found in the public domain. These issues include the provision of safe, secure and healthy workplaces, where workers are fairly renumerated and have a meaningful say in decision-making.

No company policies or commitments related to key ethical business topics – personal data protection, tax, bribery and corruption, and lobbying and political engagement – were found in the public domain. This includes ensuring ethical business conduct throughout its operations and in its business relationships.